ReviewPLOS digital health2025
Primary care physicians' perspectives on digital health tools for chronic disease management: A rapid review.
Review in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital health readiness among rural hypertensive patients: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- From pilots to platforms: making digital health work for chronic disease management.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic disease management is a burden for many patients. Digital health tools (DHTs) can leverage technology to rapidly develop and disseminate interventions to alleviate obstacles faced and promote self-care. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are most directly involved in the care of chronic disease patients; however, their perspective is often overlooked. To develop an effective DHT for chronic disease management, PCP attitudes are critical to ensure improved patient integration, adoption and care outcomes. The purpose of this rapid review is to explore and identify PCPs' perspectives and attitudes regarding DHTs for chronic disease management and generate major themes from our findings using key literature. The themes will be used to guide DHT creators, clinicians and policy makers on adoption and implementation considerations. We conducted a rapid review of primary qualitative research between 2000 and 2022. Two reviewers, independently, conducted study screening, selection, and data abstraction. The themes identified in the articles were extracted and presented narratively. The data was analyzed using NVIVO12 software. Braun and Clarke's deductive thematic analysis was used, and the themes identified were extracted and presented narratively. Nine qualitative research studies met the inclusion criteria. Themes were classified into two major categories: physician-patient relationship and physician-technology relationship. Within these, seven subcategories were identified: (1) Increased Physician Workload, (2) Data Capture & Data Quality, (3) Evidence-Based Care, (4) Education and Training, (5) Liability, (6) Patient Interactions, and (7) Patient Empowerment and Suitability. DHT creators/endorsers need to consider how DHTs affect the patient-physician relationship and the physician-technology relationship as this affects how PCPs perceive DHTs. PCPs' perspectives must be taken into consideration to promote self-care for patients living with chronic diseases.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.